The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that the roads have to be “clear of dogs” so that they do not cause accidents by running after vehicles.
Questioning the contention of animal lovers that stray dogs that are likely to attack people can be identified, Justice Vikram Nath, while presiding over a three-judge bench, said, “It is not only that the dogs may bite. They may chase somebody on a two-wheeler… they may fall and accident could occur. But by their running on the roads itself is dangerous, for passing vehicles, especially two-wheelers, cyclists… in some areas they do that.”
“The roads have to be clean and clear of dogs, no need to have them running around, causing accidents.” he added.
The bench, also comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria, was hearing a suo motu case over the issue of stray dogs biting people. On November 7, last year, while issuing directions to remove dogs from premises of institutions like schools, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations, the SC had asked the states and Union territories to file status reports on the implementation.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for animal welfare groups, said, “Not every dog does it (bites). There are some dogs which do that. Therefore, you identify.”
In reply, Justice Nath asked, “How do you identify? You cannot identify. Which dog is in which mood in the morning, you do not know!”
Sibal asked if the solution therefore is to put all dogs in shelter. “If one tiger is a man-eater that does not mean all tigers are man-eaters, he added.
Story continues below this ad
Sibal cited the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, which speak of the CSVR (Capture, Sterilise, Vaccinate and Release) formula for managing and controlling population of stray dogs. It’s globally accepted and has been successful in checking their numbers, he added.
The strays have to be released in the same area from where they are picked up for sterilisation, Sibal said, adding that “so it is consistent with our objective to save human beings…”
Justice Mehta remarked, “Only thing which is left out is providing counselling to the dogs as well, that he shall not bite once he is released back.”
Following this, Sibal said that putting a stray infected by rabies and one without in the same shelter, will ensure that all of them get rabies. He said that if the solution is to put every dog in a shelter, “that’s not a solution at all”. “Physically not possible, economically not feasible and dangerous for humans,” he added.
Story continues below this ad
He also said that when the dogs are kept in the open, the community takes care of them and the state doesn’t have to invest anything.
When Sibal said he was never bitten whenever he went to a temple or Khan Market, Justice Nath replied: “You are lucky, we are lucky, but imagine someone like a child.”
Justice Mehta added, “There are incidents of Nehru Udyan. People have been bitten, children have been bitten.”
To this, Sibal said, “We are not saying dog bites don’t take place. We are on the solution. What is the most scientific, appropriate, solution that will eliminate the problem.”
Story continues below this ad
Justice Nath said, “Basically, what we are trying to do is to monitor that… Rules, modules, the Act, are strictly followed by the authorities. This has not been done so far over decades. For that we called upon states to come forward. Some of them have come, they are in the process of making some efforts in line with the rules and regulations and the enactments and the modules. Some states have not even responded.”
“We will be harsh on those states which have not responded in such a serious matter… We can monitor from here, we cannot go down… They have to do it, and we have to make sure they do it the right way,” he added.
On Wednesday, senior advocate Gaurav Aggarwal – the amicus curiae in the matter – informed the bench that except for Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Karnataka, other states have filed status reports.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that as far as gated communities are concerned, there should be a voting process to decide whether strays should be allowed to roam freely inside.
Story continues below this ad
“Whether I want to keep (dogs) in my house or not, has to be my discretion. Going slightly further, whether dogs should be roaming around in my gated community, there is a resident welfare association, it would be essential that the community decides… Someone may tomorrow bring a buffalo… So, let there be some provision under which the community decides by way of votes…,” he added.
The bench later adjourned the proceedings for Thursday.